>CTRL+F in catalog
>No topic about Obama's choice for Supreme Court Justice now that Scalia is dead.
>Find article stating that he nominated Merrick Garland
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_garland
>Early life and family
>Garland was born on November 13, 1952 in Chicago, Illinois.[2] He was raised in the Chicago area,[3] in the northern suburb of Lincolnwood.[4]
Garland's mother Shirley (née Horwitz) was a director of volunteer services at Chicago's Council for Jewish Elderly; his father, Cyril Garland, headed Garland Advertising, a small business run out of the family's home.[5][6][3][7]
>Garland was raised as a Jew.[7] His grandparents left the Pale of Settlement in the early 20th century, fleeing anti-Semitism and seeking a better life for their children in the United States.[7] Through his father, Garland is a second cousin of Iowa Governor Terry Branstad; Garland's father and Branstad's mother are from the same Jewish immigrant family from Latvia.[8]
>Garland was raised as a Jew.
>Garland was raised as a Jew.
>Garland was raised as a Jew.
>Garland was raised as a Jew.
>Garland was raised as a Jew.
shut up goy stop asking questions
I don't care if he's jewish, what's his stance on 1A and 2A?
>appoints
He's been nominated, pending approval from Congress.
The guy will likely want to restrict the second amendment. There's no such thing as a moderate liberal.
Doesn't believe in the second amendment.
>>67694261
>Crafty jew
>>67694261
>republicucks will bend over backwards for obongo, like they love to do, and appoint him
>>67694576
Goyim shouldn't be able to defend themselves.
>>67694576
He ruled that the constitution does not give citizens the right to privately own firearms.
Pretty bad bro.
>>67694261
Why don't they someone who isn't Jewish or Catholic?
>>67694261
Another fucking kike in power.
>>67694576
>Jewish liberal from Chicago
What do you think?
>>67694576
Dude, his 3 nominees were a Jew, Pajeet, and Basketball Paul.
Don't even try to fucking deny that wasn't done on purpose.
Also, for as PC as the Left is, I find it surprising that they would want half of the SCOTUS Judges to be Jewish with 0 white protestant males.
>>67694767
Republicans need to go full Trump. They let the left drive the narrative and so just slowly lose on everything.
>>67694261
The more significant thing is
>born in Chicago
Obama has a very tight clique of Chicago intellectuals that are, to a man, profoundly corrupt. This guy will be a hardcore shill, Kagan II: Illectic Turbojew
>>67694863
Where? What ruling?
You are a fucking liar.
do you have any idea what life was like for jews in the pale? It was an absolute nightmare. I'm glad his family was able to escape that hell hole.
>>67694261
Since when does /pol hate Jews? /pol supports the most pro-Israel candidate (Trump) whose daughter is Jewish.
Obama hates Israel and /pol hates him for it. /pol sides with Netanyahu.
Shut this down now, goy.
Garland will never get on the supreme court because he hates america since he is pro life.
>>67695012
Excuse me he just completely banned handguns my mistake.
http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/432716/moderates-are-not-so-moderate-merrick-garland
>>67694261
/pol/ was right again
>>67695022
Go fuck yourself. Jews get what they deserve.
>>67695068
Trump is not rabidly pro-Israel like the rest of the Recucklicans. We hate Obama because he's a Marxist nigger faggot, and we also hate Netanyahu because he's a slimy kike. Get with the program.
So what gun law specifically would this Jew and his liberal friends of SCOTUS repeal if chosen, and how would that affect gun ownership????
>>67695395
Trump clearly stated he's the most pro Israel candidate. That's why /pol loves him so much.
When Obama told Israel they have to go back to 1967 borders, that pissed /pol off because you guys are very, very pro Israel and pro-Jew.
After all you guys are fascinated with Ivanka Trump, a literal Jew.
>>67695006
That's what I'm taking out of it too. It seems like he is very biased towards surrounding himself with people from his hometown. I mainly added the jew stuff to attract posters, but I am actually concerned with what effects this guy will have on the Bill of Rights.
NPR claimed that "if Garland were appointed, we would have the most liberal supreme court in 50 years."
Compared to the other 5 people on Obama's list, Garland isn't terrible. He's liberal, but if not for the current circumstances he would be appointed without many problems. That being said, he wants to repeal DC v Heller, so republicans need to stick to their guns...if you know what im saying
>>67695395
Netanyahu is pretty based desu the West would be better if we had leaders like him.
He's anti-Second Amendment.
Unacceptable.
>>67695609
Obama's Chicago gang has been a pretty solid meme for Beltway since day 1, I don't think he'll get approved. To be honest, I don't think this is who Obama really wants either. This is Obama throwing out the worst guy he can at first, then backing a moderate and hoping they'll take it. I hope Congress holds fast and doesn't take the bait.
>>67695283
He didn't ban anything. That doesn't even make sense.
Also, that article is profoundly misleading. Judge Garland voted in favor of rehearing the original panel decision en banc. He didn't author or join any substantive decision.
Further, it's ridiculous to suggest that he's not "moderate" because of that vote. If anything, Justice Scalia's decision-laughably couched as an "affirmation" of the private right to bear arms-has no precedent throughout all of American jurisprudence. Right or wrong, it's a debatable proposition which reading of the Second Amendment is more supported by an originalist reading. Reasonable minds differ.
>>67695693
Netanyahu does what he truly believes is best for his country, which is what a leader should do. I dislike him because that often times clashes with American interests. More leaders should be like him.
>>67695068
back to pleddit shill
>>67695975
I don't give a fucking shit about "reasonable minds" differing. I care about my gun rights.
Go fuck yourself in hell and take this unamerican crypto-kike judge with you.
>>67695774
This. He's a gun grabber.
This Kike is pretty anti-2nd amendment and yet CNN and the entire mass media calls him "moderate".....
>>67695774
This.
>>67695963
For example, we don't want people thinking like this anon
>>67695658
that just because he's the most moderate moderate on Obama's list, we must take him. Literally everyone Obama puts up will be corrupt to some degree, Obama has outright said he wishes he could run again, we must presume whoever he puts up will be his mouthpiece and must be opposed on principle.
Nothing to see here, why don't you guys go check out the latest race mixing thread?
>>67695963
4 of the other 5 people on his list were FAR FAR worse. I really thought he was going to pick the 40 year black womyn Ketanji Brown Jackson so the left could cry racism when she's rejected.
Garland is a liberal, but atleast he's qualified. 19 years on the appelate court, a few as chief judge, compared with everyone else on his list that was in their 40's and some form of oppressed race/womyn.
>>67695975
>If anything, Justice Scalia's decision-laughably couched as an "affirmation" of the private right to bear arms-has no precedent throughout all of American jurisprudence.
You know, besides the opinion of James Madison and the founders who wrote the fucking U.S. Constitution and just finished fighting a tyrannical government.
7/10 I'm flustered
>>67694261
he hasnt appointed him retard, he NOMINATES
GOP senate has DENIED him and his chance at a hearing
>>67695975
Did you even read Scalia's decision? He literally breaks down every single word of the 2nd amendment and what they mean
>>67695963
>then backing a moderate and hoping they'll take it
>I hope Congress doesn't take the bait
Why not? The president has a constitutional duty to appoint justices to the Supreme Court when vacancies arise. We clearly need competent, reasonable, pragmatic people in government. Why on Earth wouldn't you approve of the appointment of a moderate justice? Just because it's Obama's guy?
>>67695963
>>67696266
Yeah, he seems to be playing the used car salesman trick of showing off a bunch of lemons before showcasing the real thing he wants you to buy.
I really hope that Congress is smart enough to say no to him.
>>67696279
The 2nd amendment was for militias, not every rwnj in the country.
I heard Obama's nomination and when Merrick came to the mic he sounded emotional and teary, you guys telling me he was faking it to gain simpathy?
"The President told me several times he’s going to name a moderate [to fill the court vacancy], but I don’t believe him," Orrin Hatch told us. "[Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man," he told us, referring to the more centrist chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia who was considered and passed over for the two previous high court vacancies.
CONSERVATIVES BTFO
source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-supreme-court/
how the fuck are you going to twist this one to somehow make Garland out to be a leftist?
>congress and /pol/ not accepting anything but arch-conservatives
Fuck off. The supreme court needs to become more moderate.
He made it clear in his speech that he was Jewish. He seems really legit as well as grateful. Republicans are being petty, racist (against Obama) cunts about this.
>>67696649
>A FUCKING LEAF
>understanding American rights
top kek
>>67696093
>hurr shut up with your discourse, it's all about me meeeeeeeee
Fuck yourself with alacrity.
>>67696518
A president is not entitled to having his candidates approved. Obama is literally more corrupt than Nixon, the best thing we can do immediately for Washington is scrubbing every last inch of the city until you can't even remember he was president.
>>67696649
>trusting a leaf about the intent of the founding document of a nation he doesn't live in
>country's prime minster is a literal communist who is pro Islam
Leaf, please.
>>67696518
Have you been reading this thread? There is no number that the court needs to have and the man is a liberal activist. He is neither reasonable or pragmatic.
>>67694261
POST YFW WHEN OBAMA RECESS APPOINTS HIM
>>67696518
>supports banning the right to own guns
>"moderate"
>not appointing Cletus Wayne "niggerdeath1488" Allen Smith II so republitards would have no excuse
>>67696812
How was Obama corrupt?
>>67696649
"militia" in the sense it is used in every law from that time period refers to the people generally
CANADA YES
oh btw, the part giving the right refers to "the right of the people" so if you're right why does it not say "the right of the militia"?
>>67696093
I'm not saying you ought not to care about your gun rights. Nor am I saying whether or not it's good policy to have a private right to bear arms. I'm saying there's a reasonable argument to be made that the Second Amendment makes no such guarantee. That position was endorsed throughout the entire history of the Second Amendment until Heller. That is why I'm saying it's not a radical judicial position. Even if Judge Garland had taken a position--he has not--I don't think it would mean he isn't "moderate."
>>67696279
This is true, but only in part. As you can see in Heller and the briefing surrounding it, both sides can amass substantial historical evidence for their particular reading of the Second Amendment. That is, the pro-private right and anti-private right sides. Both are honest, originalist positions. The key is whether you focus on the first clause in conjunction with the second (which Scalia dubbed merely a preamble), or just the second. Additionally, it's important to note that Justice Scalia took great pains to distinguish prior cases, in the 19th and 20th century, that found there was no private right. If you want to know more, I can link you to some resources.
>>67696788
Not interested in discourse. We hold all the cards. The GOP can and will oppose any nominee that does not meet our standards. We have the leverage.
The Art of the Deal. Take your intellectualism and shove it right up your Jewish ass, kike.
>appoints
/pol/ in charge of reading comprehension, or general understanding of the nominating process
>>67696732
Because it being 4-4 with Kennedy wasn't moderate enough? A liberal justice replacing Scalia tilts the court heavily to the left. The 2nd amendment will be dead and a few years after that the first will be dead and it will be illegal to say mean things that hurt peoples feelings like in the rest o the world
>>67696732
>people who actually read the document and follow what it says rather than make shit up about how things should be don in their marxist world are "arch-conservatives"
>>67696921
Is that your Age of Empires handle, britbong?
>>67696656
I don't give a shit about some liberal crocodile tears....AWWWWWWWW HE CRIED; I SHOULD COMPLETELY GIVE IN TO THIS APPEAL TO EMOTION
>>67696732
more moderate? its packed with hard left and no right.
what it needs is to start being an interpreter of the constitution again, not an oligarchy
>>67694261
Completely unacceptable and violence-justifying.
I would have been fine with Sri.
>>67696402
Yes, have you? He largely ignores the first clause, rather than treating it as operative. I think that's a possible reading, but certainly not the only one. I'm not alone, Scalia basically chose to ignore Presser and Miller.
>>67696944
Hostility to law and direct personal profiting from government programs.
>>67697082
Anon we need to ban conservative speech. As the LIVING DOCUMENT the constitution explains "free speech" clearly means that anything outside of Obama's little red book was never meant to be protected in a modern society.
>>67697002
The dissent in Heller was fucking garbage. Scalia's opinion was beautiful, it broke down EVERY SINGLE WORD of the 2nd amendment and what it meant and why.
>>67696944
The only person he's chosen to surround himself with that isn't a close, long-time friend is Hillary Clinton. He did not even attempt to put forward casus belli for his two fuck-up wars. He manipulates racial violence to further his career. He abuses executive power.
>Jews
>1.7% of the pooulation
>4/9 of the supreme court
>protestants
>50% of the population
>0/9 on the supreme court
Nothing to see here, goyim!
>>67697238
because its not operative because of how english grammar works. the part guaranteeing the right says its for the people
The Senate should stonewall this fucking president
fuck obama. fuck his legacy. I lost all respect when he said "I have a pen and phone, and I will do what I want with or without congress"
>>67697320
He's one of those faggots who forgets how English sentence structure works when we're talking about banning guns.
>>67697366
and if you point that out they label you a bigot. I can't wait till we take back the White House.
>>67696056
>>67695693
See what I mean.
It doesn't take long for /pol to be honest about their affection for Netanyahu, Israel, and the Jewish people.
>>67697002
You're being dishonest.
There is no sincerity or historical basis for attacking the Constitution by insisting on formal redundant centralized armies with government armories. The histories of both England and America are totally unambiguous on this point. The idea of "formal militias instead of a right to bear arms" was brought up three times in the drafting of the bill of rights and it was rejected every time.
>>67697366
Anti-semite
>>67697320
>, it broke down EVERY SINGLE WORD of the 2nd amendment and what it meant and why.
>>67694261
Of course he's from Chicago. Obama's so fucking corrupt he'd make Roscoe Conkling blush.
>>67694261
First thing I looked up upon hearing the news...
>>67697591
>Muh nigga-on-nigga violence
Don't care.
>>67697591
>>67697238
>I'm not alone
You mean you're not alone on trying to restrict our rights. I'm sure you know what the 2nd actually means but will lie through your teeth to advance your agenda.
If you have actually managed to delude yourself I'm impressed.
>>67697591
>Suicides
>Niggers killing niggers
>>67697366
Honestly, I'm not opposed to having lots of Jews in the Supreme Court in principle. Judicial law is a huge part of their culture, it was their thing before money-lending was. The problem is that the Jews in our government are either crypto-Marxists or saboteurs for Israel.
>>67696649
Yes, and the 1st Amendment only applies to the press.
>>67697674
Same here Senpai
>>67697591
Your rights to not hinge on people dying, faggot.
You would be a lot safer if the government would just keep you in a box and tell you what to do.
>>67697422
>>67697320
If you hadn't noticed, I didn't say Scalia was wrong. I said the question is not a certain one. Further, I think the history of cases interpreting the Second Amendment bear that out pretty clearly.
The dissent was weak. I agree. I do however think certain academics made better arguments. Chemerinsky and Tribe have written a lot on the subject, but they're Jewish, so disqualified by /pol/ I guess. So, Amar?
>>67694261
>obama designates an ultra-liberal
>is called "moderate"by the Corrupt Nigger Network and its fellow shill media
>they will be voted in since people can only elect sub 100 IQ retards to congress
>>67697016
itt: people who'll be singing a different tune once President Hillary appoints an obese nigger bull dyke
>but MUH MURRICAN PEEPLE SHOULD DEC... oh wait..
>>67697591
>implying cars aren't vastly safer
>>67698004
If Hillary wins America ends anyway. One more commie judge on the supreme court won't change that.
Only Trump can save us now. Or the FBI.
>>67694863
false
>>67697437
This is the problem. The GOP never showed Obama an ounce of respect from day 1, but somehow he's a fucking monster for taking some things into his own hands as POTUS. If the GOP was able, they wouldn't have let Obama make even one important decision.
>>67697488
Oh, please. At the very least, Scalia's reading results in considerable surplusage to the Amendment. There is no other Amendment that has such empty aspirational language. Again, I'm not saying he's wrong. I'm just saying it's clearly not the only way to read the sentence.
> If anything, Justice Scalia's decision-laughably couched as an "affirmation" of the private right to bear arms-has no precedent throughout all of American jurisprudence
That's because there was no fucking precedent before then, because it took 220 years for people stupid enough to honestly believe "the right of the people" doesn't mean an individual right to come around and pass laws with that idiotic notion in mind.
As for the Garland, while he didn't cast an actual decision anywhere, he did vote for further review on a case that had already upheld a pro-gun position. It is supremely unlikely he did so because he agreed with the decision and just wanted to further review it for shits and giggles. Its even more unlikely when you consider that this guy has been willing to sign off on countless government oversteps on all sorts of other issues. His jurisprudence has basically consisted of "fuck you, the government can do what it wants". That doesn't bode well for his 2A views.
>>67698004
>>67696649
No, it wasn't. Stop embarrassing us you fucking cuck.
OBAMA
FUCK
I HATE YOU SO MUCH
>>67698268
>implying he ever respected the republicans when his party had a supermajority in congress
It's funny how democrats always forget about the first two years of Obama's presidency and how he didn't reach out to them at all.
Also doesn't help that all of Obama's policies are fucking garbage.
>>67695578
He's also said "He has the best words". He's pandering. He doesn't want to take a side- he wants to negotiate. That's better than continuing to arm Israel to the teeth so they can blast Palestinians off the face of the earth.
There is literally nothing on here that would lead anyone to believe that we're pro-jew. Go fuck yourself, maplegargler
>>67697973
If you have a link to their arguments I'll check them out
>>67697569
K I K E
I I
K I K E
E E
>>67697123
The man got us, the United States citizens, a death sentence for McVey.
Or does /pol think the Ok city bombing was just now?
How the fuck do people think the lead prosecuter of the ok city bombing is a bleeding heart liberal.
The man DEMANDED he get that trial just so he could kill that fucker, that aint liberal.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_breakfast_table/features/2016/merrick_garland_nomination/merrick_garland_is_a_hugely_disappointing_supreme_court_pick.html
a CIS WHITE MAN???? COME ON IT'S THE CURRENT CENTURY
>>67697722
Do you even know where black people live?
>>67698270
>There is no other Amendment that has such empty aspirational language.
The prefatory clause is not empty, nor aspirational. It does matter. It just doesn't mean the right comes with some sort of pre-requisite to be a militia member, like you retards think it does.
The 2nd Amendment ensures that citizens can form militias, by ensuring that they have the means to do so - namely, weapons. The notion that the 2nd Amendment requires you to be in a militia first before you have a right to weapons is putting the cart before the horse. Weapons a prerequisite to a militia, not the other way around.
If the Senate stonewalls Obama, what are the chances Thomas has an "unexpected" heart attack? After all, he was almost 70 and Black men are so predisposed to this sort of thing ;)
>>67698656
>leftists can't kill people who bombed children
Dude that is probably the stupidest thing I've ever read.
>>67698739
Because slate is an example of journalism excellence....
>>67694576
>>67698656
Too bad he wants to take away the rights of US citizens to keep and bear arms, and defend themselves from people like McVey.
We elect a nigger, and be tries to stick a jew in supreme Court.
I'M BAFFLED.
>>67698843
Liberals that /pol hate, do not support the death penalty. EVER.
>>67698812
Things are looking bad, honestly. We need a god damn AI to be the supreme court. So stupid that everything is a political battle because people won't do their damn jobs instead of trying to be powerful.
>>67698656
Is this suppose to convince me? He demanded a trial for someone who killed people......as opposed to what? This is pretty weak bait.
>>67698913
What ruling was that? You dumb fedora wearing twats have yet to produce a single legal case were he did that.
>>67697577
This is absolutely and totally untrue. Have you read any of the arguments aginst your position? The historical evidence is very inconsistent. Just read the Chemerinsky brief.
>>67697732
There are virtually no liberties or rights in the Constitution that are treated as absolute. Most rights are subject to some degree of restriction, with varying levels of scrutiny. Further, stop ascribing an agenda to me.
And I meant I'm not alone in that the Supreme Court disagreed with Scalia in Presser and Miller.
>>67697422
For what it's worth, some linguistics and English PhDs wrote an amicus brief and sided with D.C. (in favor of the restriction). So again, I think it's ridiculous to suggest there's only one reading.
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/preview/publiced_preview_briefs_pdfs_07_08_07_290_PetitionerAmCu3LinguisticsEnglishProfsnew.authcheckdam.pdf
>>67699121
Read the fucking thread you retard
>>67695283
>>67699048
Why not term limits for supreme Court?
>>67699048
Its not that they're trying to be powerful, its that they prefer to read things in an utterly asinine way in order to bend it to their beliefs.
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? Well, I hate guns, so I say this phrase does not mean the the people have a right to keep and bear arms.
>>67699121
He didn't do it. He voted to rehear the D.C. Circuit's panel decision in the case that became Heller. He was in the minority and the case was not heard en banc.
>>67694576
>what's his stance on 1A and 2A?
against.
>>67699116
You have no clue how much work it is to kill someone legally, this guy was so good at it there was no question if McVey was going to die.
He is an outstanding fucking legal mind but it is dumb morons like you that scream "LIBERAL KIKE!" everytime a non libertarian is even mentioned.
>>67699321
The nose knows.
>>67699219
Then laws would simply sway with the wind. It would be a pseudo-legislative branch with control from the president.
Every 4 years "abortion is banned! guns are illegal!" and back and forth ad infinitum.
>>67699048
An AI shouldn't do it, neither should an autist, an understanding of history and language is just as important as logic in reading the Constitution. It all comes down to corruption and the mediation of that.
>>67695283
Oh I am sorry, is the national review a formal legal court document now?
Fuck you morons are extra retard today.
>>67699443
Outstanding legal mind=Best Bullshitter standing in bullshit that convinces everyone that he's not that one that smells.
Fuck lawyers.
>>67699219
The lifetime appointment of a judge is the biggest protection from executive or legislative abuse. Literally the only thing that can sway a judge from sticking to their guns is murder.
Conservatives are the biggest cowards in America. They thump the Constitution against their chests only when it concerns the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights but are utterly clueless when it comes to anything outside of it.
What's wrong with being Jewish?
>>67699619
kek fuck off faggot he didn't want to review it so he could agree and you know it.
>>67698806
Stop being so defensive. Are you that scared of disagreement? I never said I espoused a contrary position. I said it's a close question and one that would not disqualify someone from being a moderate.
I understand the argument you're making, I just don't think it's inevitable.
>>67698601
Give me a minute and I'll get some PDF links.
>>67699308
Which he did not rule on.....
>>67699681
>implying the second amendment isn't the most important one
Everything is negotiable once you've disarmed a population.
>>67698739
>Stern
A VOTE FOR MERRICK GARLAND IS A VOTE TO REPEAL THE SECOND AMENDMENT!
>>67699443
Don't really want an outstanding legal mind that would undermine my political values desu desu
You can see why this person on the SCOTUS would be a problem for me and people who think like me, yes?
>>67699172
Protip: Smart people say stupid shit because they *want* to believe false things are true. Case in point, the notion that "the right of the people" refers to individual rights every time its used the Constitution, except for the one time it happens to be used regarding something I dislike.
There is zero ambiguity about what that phrase means, and even if there were, the recorded opinions of the people who actually wrote the fucking thing are pretty clear that they think individuals have a right to own weapons. And yet, plenty of otherwise smart people manage to delude themselves into thinking otherwise simply because they don't like guns and don't want to accept that they're a right.
>>67699838
No, it's fucking not. You think the government is scared of a bunch of fat nerds with guns? They're far more afraid of the citizenry's ability to speak their mind and organize, rights guaranteed to us in the First Amendment.
The second you lose your right to free speech and assembly, your right to be a free thinking man is when you've lost the entire concept of being American.
>>67699443
Get fucked you stupid kike. I don't care how much you want this liberal in power-- we have control of the House/Senate and the Constitution will not become the living document you oh so desperately want it to be...
>>67698601
OK.
https://www.tourolaw.edu/LawReview/uploads/pdfs/_7_Chem_2d%20Amend_SM_Final_5.15.09_.pdf
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/preview/publiced_preview_briefs_pdfs_07_08_07_290_PetitionerAmCuChemerinskyWinkler.authcheckdam.pdf
Generally speaking, I think the Second Amendment probably guarantees a private right to bear arms. But I also think the Second Amendment, like all other rights in the Constitution, is probably subject to reasonable regulation. Even Scalia agreed with that.
>>67696649
>It is the right of every person to possess armaments, because it is the right of the people to form a free militia
Translation for you, Leaf. Just like it is the right of the people to free speech SO they can create a free press, peacefully assemble, practice their own religion, etc.
These rights our endowed by our creator/natural rights. The government has no power to abridge.
>>67700299
Checked and worked.
So 5 kikes in the Supreme Court but muricans don't see a problem with that. Kikes are 2% of the US population.
>>67694576
The goyim should be enslaved and their money taken
>>67699999
"smart people say stupid shit because they want to believe false things are true"
This logic has no end. Do you really think everyone who disagrees with you is just ideologically deluded and irrational? The Second Amendment is an interesting case but liberals, generally embracing very broad conceptions of individual rights, think it should be narrow. Conservatives, ordinarily taking the contrary position, say the Second Amendment is a broad individual right. Is everyone just deluding themselves?
You can say there's zero ambiguity, but no one can person can be such an arbiter. I think you grossly overstate the clarity of the language and of the historical record. And many many people also disagree. The ones with opinions opposing your own are all making such arguments in bad faith? Blinded by politics? Give me a break.
>>67699756
>Are you that scared of disagreement?
Yes, I am scared of big government dim wits selectively reading the Constitution to justify whatever encroachment on liberties is up that day.
"HURR DURR 2nd Amendment is a 'collective' right, which means you as an individual have no rights, therefore gun bans okay."
"HURR DURR 4th Amendment only says , therefore warrantless wiretaps okay."
"HURR DURR 4th amendment says persons, houses, papers, and effects, nothing about digital devices. Also says unreasonable searches and seizures, but anything the FBI wants must be reasonable. Therefore handover the iOS source-code Apple."
"HURR DURR 1st Amendment only says congress shall make no law 'bridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble', doesn't say anything about imposing restrictions on the locations where this happens, therefore take your protest 10 miles away, well out of site."
It never fucking ends
>>67700356
I don't think you realize how dangerous internal turmoil is for a government. If a country has a serious problem with internal anti-government forces it's blood in the water to international rivals that the current regime is weak and unable to even provide domestic security. People vastly underestimate how destabilizing even a minor internal conflict can be.
>>67694261
> Garland's father and Branstad's mother are from the same Jewish immigrant family from Latvia.[8]
Why were there so many jews in Latvia and Eastern Europe in general?
>>67701037
>Do you really think everyone who disagrees with you is just ideologically deluded and irrational?
>The ones with opinions opposing your own are all making such arguments in bad faith? Blinded by politics?
On this particular subject, yes, they absolutely fucking are.
>The Second Amendment is an interesting case but liberals, generally embracing very broad conceptions of individual rights, think it should be narrow. Conservatives, ordinarily taking the contrary position, say the Second Amendment is a broad individual right. Is everyone just deluding themselves?
Somewhat, yes. Conservatives delude themselves on a lot of things. For all his bluster about originalism, Scalia himself was notorious for selectively reading the Constitution in order to placate his own personal beliefs.
>>67700356
Nice sophistry, but a bunch of people marching unarmed shouting slogans is much less scary than a few dozen people armed with high-caliber rifles. You can always kill enough politicians for them to reinstate your right to assembly and speech.
>>67701120
I don't disagree with most of what you've said. I was taking issue with the tenor of your response. And I've stated elsewhere in the thread, I think the Second Amendment does guarantee a private right, but I find it amusing that liberals and conservatives are flipped from their usual orientations on this issue.
>>67700485
The second one doesn't dispute let alone refute anything in Scalia's opinion, it just gives a summary of Heller. I'm reading the longer one now
My theory is that the media is going to make the GOP look like a bunch of uncooperative bastards when they refuse a "moderate".
This isn't good and could help the Dems in November.
>>67697016
>i'm stupid, vulgar, and proud
Please sterilize yourself as a personal favor to the rest of this country.
>MUH GUNS
what do you guys do with your guns?
I have 2, but neither is semi automatic.
50 years from now you'll wish you'd bought land instead
>>67701501
Bingo.
Pic related.
American tanks were thundering across the Kuwait-Iraq border a couple months after this.
The government only gives a fuck what you think at election time, and then only barely.
>>67696812
Obviously not, but the Senate has a constitutional responsibility to either approve or reject the nomination. The hearings should get held, and the nominee's merits and faults should be discussed.
>>67696870
Valid enough. But the public and government acknowledge that there's a vacancy, and the president is charged to fill vacancies. Hold the hearings.
>>67696906
Read my post again. Garland is not the hypothetical moderate to whom I (and the anon to whom I responded) are referring.
For what it's worth, if Republicans really want to make an argument about voting for a rehearing in a Second Amendment case, they should vote him down. My main issue is I think refusing to have a hearing is obscene.
>>67696870
How is he not reasonable or pragmatic? How is he a liberal activist?
>>67696906
I don't think that's a disqualifying position for a moderate. But, more importantly, it isn't one that he has even taken.
>>67702580
No where in the constitution does it say that the senate HAS TO have an up/down vote. It is their right to "advise and consent," but how they do that isn't specified, so it's up to them
>>67702055
>fudds on /pol/
SHALL
>>67702580
Sure, there's nothing wrong with a hearing, but it'd be a kangaroo court. His flaws are immediately obvious, he is transparently Obama's tool for continuing influence. That's really sufficient to throw him out.
>>67696266
Still think that not voting for Romney was a bad idea?
>>67694261
Obama's appointment doesn't mean shit until the majority Republican Senate approves it.
Now shut up and go do something productive.
>>67702890
But anon. The Senate ISN'T. They're basically just pretending the nomination didn't happen. Saying "the people should decide" is an excuse, no matter who says it: GOP or Democrats. The Supreme Court isn't meant to be the realm of the average American voter. It's not elected.
Maybe this climate will change in the coming weeks/months, but you have to admit, this whole mess is pretty flagrant politicization of a Court that's supposed to be elevated above petty partisan squabbling.
>>67703076
Then no one will blame the Senate at all for holding the hearing, grilling him, receiving unsatisfactory responses, and refusing to grant him the position.
>>67694576
Pro 1A, anti 2A
>>67696601
Cannot see it happening, will need to look like they can play ball with democrats if Trump wants the Uniter status, this was the most moderate choice possible Obama can give. If its refused then there will be a huge revolt because it was underscore the meme of Oppressive Republicans who only want to ensure the gridlock stays for personal gain.
>>67703604
I've only seen his stance on the 2A.
>register all the naughty goy weapons
>banning semi-auto is in the interests of Israel goys!! Are you a fucking anti-Semite
But I haven't seen anything on his 1A stances. How do you know he doesn't support banning "hate speech" against God's chosen?
>>67703439
Again, no where in the constitution does it say the sensate HAS TO have an up/down vote. I'm not saying they necessarily should or shouldn't, but the notion that they're obligated to have a vote is incorrect
>>67703614
Trump has such huge numbers I'm confident he can exploit this situation and continue on to be a uniter. Public support is like a currency, the more you have the more you can get away with but every time you exploit it you lose some. Obama came in on a huge wave of goodwill and he basically got two years free from serious criticism. Trump has even bigger presence and exploiting this situation would be better for the republic. He should appoint a conservative judge, whether he'll go more mainstream conservative or libertarian is a more debatable political maneuver, and continue on with a unified, moderate approach on mostly everything else, as promised.
>>67704225
His stance on the 2A is enough to deny the chosen one
>>67704225
I don't know if he's actually ruled on any hate speech stuff, he's sort of mixed on campaign finance/citizens united, but in his ruling in favor of Citizens United, it was most likely simply a matter of precedent. On the Supreme Court he may overturn if it came back to the court in some way. I assume he's pro death penalty since he wanted McVey to die
>>67697179
I'm going to assume this thread is full of this kind of delusion
>>67694886
>Why don't they someone who isn't Jewish or Catholic?
Good idea.
Atheists, Muslims and Hindus should be represented as well.
Thanks for the idea.
>>67704791
Your fucking retarded if you think the Supreme Court should be moderate.
The Supreme Court should be like Scalia, interpret the Constitution as it was written nothing more nothing less, fuck you and your pinko bullshit you pillow biting pixie.
>>67704791
Correct.
>>67704225
Where did you see this stance? I don't think there was even a witten opinion in the denial of rehearing in Parker/Heller.
>>67694886
>implying anyone else respects tradition
>Jews based their entire culture on jurisprudence and scholasticism in antiquity, even now they regularly have debates with God
>Catholics have a huge library of traditions they must acknowledge before adding new ideas, tradition is explicitly valued rather than implicitly after the Reformation
Meanwhile
>Protestants do ~what feels right~
>Atheists do not believe in inalienable rights
>Muslims
>>67704863
The 2nd most likely choice for Obama's pick was a Hindu/Indian. So if Garland actually gets a vote and loses we may get one
>>67705102
But Scalia didn't do that at all, despite all the made-up mythos suggesting so. No one does. That doesn't make any sense. This recent article on the subject is fairly good. Ignore the stupid title. It's by Judge Posner.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-supreme-court-is-a-political-court-republicans-actions-are-proof/2016/03/09/4c851860-e142-11e5-8d98-4b3d9215ade1_story.html
>>67694261
Obama only nominated him. The republicans are going to delay it until 2017, as is their right.
>>67705268
You mean the registration part? Here:
>Moreover, in the case mentioned earlier, Garland voted with Tatel to uphold an illegal Clinton-era regulation that created an improvised gun registration requirement. Congress prohibited federal gun registration mandates back in 1968, but as Kopel explained, the Clinton Administration had been "retaining for six months the records of lawful gun buyers from the National Instant Check System." By storing these records, the federal government was creating an informal gun registry that violated the 1968 law. Worse still, the Clinton program even violated the 1994 law that had created the NICS system in the first place. Congress directly forbade the government from retaining background check records for law abiding citizens.
>Garland thought all of these regulations were legal, which tells us two things. First, it tells us that he has a very liberal view of gun rights, since he apparently wanted to undo a key court victory protecting them. Second, it tells us that he's willing to uphold executive actions that violate the rights of gun owners. That's not so moderate, is it? [National Review, Bench Memos, 3/11/16]
>>67705526
Yes, because Hillary's choice will be so much better.
>>67696944
First example that comes to mind is doesn't do his fucking job as President.
You know as HEAD OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
You know, the branch THAT FUCKING ENFORCES THE LAWS.
>lol catch and release illegal immigration even though consequences are clearly put forth by the letter of the law.
>lol the states are smoking weed? lol 420 blaze it fags
>lol they wanna pass laws to take your guns? lol too bad faggot
Combine this with the constant race baiting and nepotism, and yeah, he's pretty fucking corrupt.
>>67705747
>implying
>>67705653
That's a bit different than the rhetoric in this thread. But again, "very liberal view of gun rights" here makes no sense. If anything, the "liberal" position is one of expansive individual rights, which includes the individual right to bear arms. Even still, nearly all rights in the constitution are subject to reasonable regulation. How is this not moderate? National Review has really become a joke.
>>67698812
Fuck me Anon, don't even put that thought out into the universe lest it become reality.
>>67705795
It's called prosecutorial discretion. AKA what every enforcing body does.
>>67698511
Obama wasted two years doing nothing when he could have created millions of jobs rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure .
Obama did more for the gay than he did for his own poor and disadvantaged.
If you want to see what liberals are like when people aren't watching, read about what's happening in Connecticut .
>>67694576
>I don't care if he's jewish
Ordinarily I don't care either as I don't hate old testament readers that bad.
However as pointed out - if confirmed the Supreme Court would be 4 jews, 4 "catholics".
>>67694261
>Garland
so... Kuja when?
>>67706141
No prosecution worth their salt just lets felonies slide, EVERY TIME.
And that still doesn't excuse him from enforcing laws that are unconstitutional.
>>67696876
What are these lazy fucks doing in recess during this time?
They can't handle 5 consecutive work days or something?
>>67706162
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/preview/publiced_preview_briefs_pdfs_07_08_07_290_PetitionerAmCu3LinguisticsEnglishProfsnew.authcheckdam.pdf
>>67705462
All of them do it to an extent, republican and democrat alike, but I think Scalia either did it the least or maybe he was just better at it.
>>67705959
>oy vey
SHALL!!!
>>67705959
"Reasonable regulation" is the most ambiguous thing that has ever been said
>>67706455
And what exactly am I supposed to be looking for here champ?
>>67694261
PURE COINCIDENCE
Republicans are fucking hilarious. They suck off that fat fuck Scalia for defending the constitution, then pledge to deny Obama of his constitutional duty to appoint a new justice before Scalia's body was even cold. Maybe we should lower the president's term limit to 3 years since that's apparently the limit on how long he's allowed to do his job.
>>67705864
Thanks to GOLLY GEE you can expect Trump to get a thorough beat down from the establishment at the brokered convention. They'll make him pay for miraculously dodging all their hits thus far.
>>67698270
Really?
because all the dissent could come up with was:
1) gun stats, children get shot in the streets
2) IT SHOULDNT BE INCORPORATED BECAUSE ONE OBSCURE NEW ENGLAND LAW THAT WAS REPEALED BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION WAS SIGNED
read up, ya dummy. The dissent's argument was trash and everyone knows it.
Tbh senpai it should only apply to the states, but then the cuckhold congress would just use the DCC and CC to restrict it further, so we can't do that shit.
in short, shut the fuck up
>>67694261
The Republicans aren't going to let it happen.
>>67700356
>The second you lose your right to free speech and assembly, your right to be a free thinking man is when you've lost the entire concept of being American.
Hate speech
"Speech has consequences"'
>>67694261
1A
>goyim can't say anything bad about the jews
2A
>goyim can't own guns
>>67706286
>makes reference to FFIX instead of the oringal FF
>>67694261
>>Garland was raised as a Jew.
>>Garland was raised as a Jew.
>>Garland was raised as a Jew.
>>Garland was raised as a Jew.
>>Garland was raised as a Jew.
So what.
So what.
So what.
So what.
So what.
Clarence Thomas was raised black. You don't have any problem with him.
>>67706755
It's too late no member of congress or the senate will work more than 50 days a year.
Fuck the country the rest of the time
>>67706668
No where in the constitution does it say the senate MUST give an up/down vote, how they choose to "advise and consent" is entirely up to them.
>>67706605
I'm just using as as shorthand for the various levels of scrutiny applied to certain individual rights. That's not the standard, but merely a category.
>>67706540
nice memes.
>>67706467
Just better at it is probably right.
>>67706633
pages 2-5 (pdf pages 11-14) if you can't be bothered to read the argument.
>>67706948
Jews are arguably worse than blacks, anon.
>>67697569
Israelis and cultural Marxist Jews are not one in the same. You don't see Israel allowing mass immigration. They're nationalists, just as every country should be. That being said, we should send the cultural Marxist Jews back to their homeland.
>>67706722
I'm guessing you haven't read all my posts in the thread. You'll get no arguments from me in support of the dissent. The dissent does not represent the only argument which conflicts with Scalia's, however.
Does not believe citizens should own guns.
Everything else is irrelevant because that stance makes him a traitor to the country and its constitution.
>>67707440
cont. (didn't mean to post). I agree with the Scalia outcome, but I do not think that position is impervious to criticism.
>>67703059
NOT BE
>>67706670
>implying MY STARS AND GARTERS stole anyone's votes but Rato and Roboto
The "shall not be infringed" meme is one of the dumbest. It doesn't get you anywhere because the scope of the right (not whether it is being infringed) is the point of contention.
>>67707464
The first thing to look for in a nominee. If they are against the second, they need to go.
>>67703439
>this whole mess is pretty flagrant politicization of a Court that's supposed to be elevated above petty partisan squabbling.
The Court hasn't been above partisan squabbling for decades.
>>67706954
Does it matter? It's not like the president can executive power a judge into office, he needs congressional approval
>>67706188
What's happening in Connecticut, black man?
>>67707200
> various levels of scrutiny applied to certain individual rights.
Schlomo, could you please explain which one of these words you're having difficulty with tonight.
>SHALL
>NOT
>BE
>INFRINGED
>COMMIE
>KIKE
>FAGGOT
>BACK
>TO
>>67695181
>pro life
Judge Garland has not often dealt with social issues, at a 2005 book event, he reportedly described the release of the papers of the late Justice Harry Blackmun — the author of the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision — as a “great gift to the country.”
RNC have always been risk takers. Think they're gonna gamble and hope for a win in the election. Definitely going to be an election issue that might motivate more people to vote.
>>67707875
Supreme Court Justices have been recess appointed, not in modern times, but it has happened.
>>67707875
No he won't well for another year at least
He's in and all decisions for about a year and a half are up for re-examining afterwards
>>67695975
SHALL
>>67707804
It belongs to the people and is packaged with the militia. All citizens belong to the militia. It's double guaranteed.
Why does it always have to be the jews?
Has a SCOTUS member ever been forced to step down against their will? Is there any checks if the judges get loaded with shitheads that work against our best interest?
I'm relatively pro-gun but I've always thought that the way in which Americans treat the Constitution as a Bible is hilarious. Law can and should evolve, what's important is principles.
>>67707834
And that's shameful.
>>67708157
They can be impeached, but it never happens
>>67694261
JEWISH PRIVILEGE!
JEWISH PRIVILEGE!
JEWISH PRIVILEGE!
> Why does no one talk about Jewish privilege? What % are they of the US pop? It's pretty crazy desu.
>>67707893
see
>>67707804
Further, "shall not" doesn't mean there cannot be regulation. "Shall make no law" in the First Amendment isn't absolute, and the Supreme Court agreed in Heller that the Second Amendment isn't absolute either (though they didn't define a clear standard there or in McDonald).
>>67694767
I can imagine the establishment logic now
>oh god trump won
>we got to appoint someone now so trump doesn't get a chance to poison the court with a non shill choice. We can't hold out for 4 or 8 years. We gotta appoint Obama's pick.
>>67708265
The electoral college is an awful way of picking a president but >muh constitution
>>67706668
>[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint... Judges of the Supreme Court
He has a duty to nominate them. He needs the consent of the Senate to appoint them, which he does not have.
>>67698812
>Ginsburg is 83
One can only hope.
>>67706188
Obama is not in control of the money, congress is.
>>67708157
The second amendment is about it.
>>67708265
Yeah, all laws should be determined by "Mexican intellectuals"
>>67707200
>pages 2-5 (pdf pages 11-14) if you can't be bothered to read the argument.
First of all, fuck you and you condescending tone.
Secondly, YOU'RE missing the argument of the thread in that there IS NO ARGUMENT.
THE 2ND AMENDMENT IS FUCKING IRONCLAD.
>A WELL BALANCED BREAKFAST, NECESSARY TO START OF ANY GOOD DAY, THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE TO BUY AND CONSUME FOOD SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>OH YEAH MAN, BREAKFAST HAS THE RIGHT TO FOOD, NOT THE PEOPLE
>I TOTALLY AM SMART BUT HAD A STROKE AND FORGET SENTENCE STRUCTURE FOR THIS ONE INSTANCE
And let's review other things shall we?
>2nd amendment wasn't made by a sovereign nation just because. It was made by a group of rebels who were in the process of overthrowing a corrupt government. So you know, in the even the government became corrupt we could overthrow them again
>B-B-BUT greasy nerds could never do that!
Considering repubs live in all the choke points and bread baskets of this country, I'm going to disagree with this common argument. Not to mention that a good deal of our military would flip. My grandfather, a brigadier general, had nightmares of this shit happening.
>the opinions of the founding father's are well documented on this matter
>EVEN IF you were right, militia has been defined
>ALL ABLE BODY MALES AGED 17-45
>14th amendment extends to this everyone
>B-B-BUT IT'S A LIVING DOCUMENT. CLEARLY 2ND AMENDMENT IS OUT OF DATE
Then fucking have it amended you shit, instead of having it be eroded.
You don't have a fucking leg to stand on for this argument, but keep on being pretentious and passive aggressive, you arrogant cunt.
>>67707302
>You don't see Israel allowing mass immigration. They're nationalists, just as every country should be.
Nationalism is only allowed for Israel. Goy countries have to have open boarders.
>kikes run our media
>kikes run our financial system
>kikes now run the highest court in the land
How do I get off this ride /pol/
